Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org
Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org).
package debian-policy
Ignoring bugs not assigned to: debian-policy
severity 533577 minor
Bug#533577: Breaks are supported in stable,
Currently it is not possible to (reliably) decide, whether an
translated man page is up to date or not. In fact quite a few
translations are outdated (missing newer parameters and other
information) or not a translation at all but a rewrite for a previous
version. While this is an upstream
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org
Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org).
package debian-policy
Ignoring bugs not assigned to: debian-policy
usertags 522217 - proposal
Bug#522217: debian-policy: Drop
Julien Cristau jcris...@debian.org writes:
Ping Russ? :)
Sorry about the long delay on the rewrite of the X installation
directory section. Here's proposed rewording for the whole section.
How does this look to everyone?
diff --git a/policy.sgml b/policy.sgml
index 43cf4d6..f0e2c6e 100644
---
Hello Russ,
On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 11:19:50PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
After reading the thread, I propose the following reduced version of
this patch. It omits some of the more specific instructions (as
discussed), which can be covered in the devref, and it also avoids the
assumption that
On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 09:03:19PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Cyril Brulebois k...@debian.org writes:
From: Cyril Brulebois k...@debian.org
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 21:40:50 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Drop (build|) dependencies on perl (= 5.6.0-16).
This version of perl is so obsolete that
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 01:28:23PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 09:03:19PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Cyril Brulebois k...@debian.org writes:
From: Cyril Brulebois k...@debian.org
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 21:40:50 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Drop (build|)
Bill Allombert bill.allomb...@math.u-bordeaux1.fr writes:
I agree that the requirement for = 5.6.0-16 should be removed but
probably the requirement for 'Build-Depends: perl' should be kept ?
Or maybe I am missing the big picture ?
There's earlier text in the same section outside the context
On Sat, Jun 20 2009, Russ Allbery wrote:
After reading the thread, I propose the following reduced version of
this patch. It omits some of the more specific instructions (as
discussed), which can be covered in the devref, and it also avoids the
assumption that the original man page is in
On Fri, Jun 19 2009, Russ Allbery wrote:
Cyril Brulebois k...@debian.org writes:
From: Cyril Brulebois k...@debian.org
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 21:40:50 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Drop (build|) dependencies on perl (= 5.6.0-16).
This version of perl is so obsolete that dropping any reference to
Manoj Srivastava sriva...@debian.org writes:
This is a new rule being introduced as a SHOULD level, meaning
that any packages that are shipping out-of-date alternate language man
pages are instantly buggy. Are we happy with that?
Personally, I think all such packages are already
Hi,
On Sat, Jun 20 2009, Russ Allbery wrote:
diff --git a/policy.sgml b/policy.sgml
index 43cf4d6..528c4b9 100644
--- a/policy.sgml
+++ b/policy.sgml
@@ -3118,76 +3118,39 @@ Package: libc6
distribution(s) where this version of the package should
be installed. Valid
On Sat, Jun 20 2009, Russ Allbery wrote:
Sorry about the long delay on the rewrite of the X installation
directory section. Here's proposed rewording for the whole section.
How does this look to everyone?
I was wondering if is it OK not to have a transition period for
this change,
Russ Allbery r...@debian.org writes:
Bill Allombert bill.allomb...@math.u-bordeaux1.fr writes:
I agree that the requirement for = 5.6.0-16 should be removed but
probably the requirement for 'Build-Depends: perl' should be kept ?
Or maybe I am missing the big picture ?
There's earlier text
Hi everyone:
I was reading the Debian Policy Manual 2.4, which discusses the
various sections that packages may be classified as. However, I can't
tell if section names should be lowercase, or if they are
case-insensitive.
Presumably case shouldn't matter, but I think there should be
Jonathan Yu jonathan.i...@gmail.com writes:
I was reading the Debian Policy Manual 2.4, which discusses the
various sections that packages may be classified as. However, I can't
tell if section names should be lowercase, or if they are
case-insensitive.
Presumably case shouldn't matter, but
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 02:29:27PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
perl is build essential. dpkg-dev depends on it.
dpkg-dev's dependency on perl is an implementation detail, not a guaranteed
build-essential interface.
--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
I noticed Russ responded via the archives.. Turns out I wasn't
subscribed to debian-policy before.
Anyway, thanks for the clarification Russ. The reason I was wondering
is because it is noted that field names themselves are
case-insensitive, so I wasn't sure if the same thing applied for field
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 12:47:34PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 02:29:27PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
perl is build essential. dpkg-dev depends on it.
dpkg-dev's dependency on perl is an implementation detail, not a guaranteed
build-essential interface.
That might
On Fri, 19 Jun 2009, Russ Allbery wrote:
Here is an updated patch for stating that the Debian archive doesn't
support listing multiple distributions in the *.changes file. This
reduces the footnote of distributions to just a couple of examples and
defers to the devref for everything else.
On Fri, 19 Jun 2009, Russ Allbery wrote:
+ Configuration files for window managers and display managers
+ should be placed in a subdirectory of file/etc/X11//file
+ corresponding to the package name due to these programs' tight
+ integration with the mechanisms
Raphael Hertzog hert...@debian.org writes:
On Fri, 19 Jun 2009, Russ Allbery wrote:
+Configuration files for window managers and display managers
+should be placed in a subdirectory of file/etc/X11//file
+corresponding to the package name due to these programs' tight
Raphael Hertzog hert...@debian.org writes:
On Fri, 19 Jun 2009, Russ Allbery wrote:
Here is an updated patch for stating that the Debian archive doesn't
support listing multiple distributions in the *.changes file. This
reduces the footnote of distributions to just a couple of examples
and
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org
Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org).
package debian-policy
Ignoring bugs not assigned to: debian-policy
tags 514919 = pending
Bug#514919: Removing support for uploads to
Package: debian-policy
Version: 3.8.2.0
Severity: wishlist
Tags: patch
In response to http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=494714 I
would like that the policy be updated to allow the Binary field in .dsc and
.changes to span over multiple lines.
Here's a suggested patch:
---
On Sun, 21 Jun 2009, Raphaël Hertzog wrote:
--- a/policy.sgml
+++ b/policy.sgml
@@ -3276,7 +3276,9 @@ Package: libc6
commasfootnote
A space after each comma is conventional.
/footnote. Currently the packages must be separated using
- only
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org
Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org).
package debian-policy
Ignoring bugs not assigned to: debian-policy
tags 533852 - patch
Bug#533852: debian-policy: Allow Binary field
Raphaël Hertzog hert...@debian.org writes:
In response to http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=494714
I would like that the policy be updated to allow the Binary field in
.dsc and .changes to span over multiple lines.
This would be the first field in .dsc and .changes that would
28 matches
Mail list logo
